Phytoplankton Diversity and Water Quality Assessment of ONGC Pond, Hazira
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
International Journal of Research in Environmental Science (IJRES)
Volume 1, Issue 1, June 2015, PP 1-5
www.arcjournals.org
Phytoplankton Diversity and Water Quality Assessment of
ONGC Pond, Hazira
Ekhalak Ansari, Mohini Gadhia, N.C. Ujjania
Department of Aquatic Biology
Veer Narmad South Gujarat University, Surat, (Gujarat) India
aquatic44@yahoo.com
Abstract: Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) is leading national oil company refines crude oil and
natural gas etc. Large amount of water is used in refining process. Water used in the process is
non-consumptive and come out as wastewater and after treatment the treated wastewater is stored in cemented
pond of 0.05 ha before discharging into Tapi river.
Diversity of phytoplankton was investigated in same cemented pond. Water quality parameters including color,
temperature, total solids, total dissolved solids, total suspended solids, pH, total hardness, total alkalinity,
chloride, phosphate, silicate, nitrate, DO, BOD, COD, and ammonia were monitored.
Total seventy three genera of phytoplankton belonged to four classes viz., Euglenophyceae, Chlorphyceae,
Bacillariophyceae and Cyanophyceae were identified. Chlorophyceae group was dominated among the four
classes. Levels of oxygen (5.678±0.218 mg/L), nitrate (4.089 ± 0.926 mg/L), phosphate (0.257 ± 56.786 mg/L)
and silicate (0.218 ± 0.029 mg/L) showed direct relationship with the diversity of phytoplankton.
Keywords: Water quality, Cemented pond, Phytoplankton and ONGC.
1. INTRODUCTION
Phytoplankton represents the microscopic algal communities of water bodies and the pioneer of
aquatic food chain. The productivity of an aquatic system is directly related to diversity of
phytoplankton. They are source of food for zooplankton, fishes and other aquatic organisms.
According to Harikrishnan et al., (1999), the maintenance of a healthy aquatic ecosystem depends on
the physico-chemical and the biological diversity of the ecosystem. Physico-chemical parameters
affect plankton distribution, occurrence and species diversity (Raymond, 1983). Diversity of
phytoplankton responds rapidly to changes in the aquatic environment particularly in relation to silica
and other nutrients (Eggs and Aksnes, 1992; Chellappa et al., 2008). In India, diversity of
phytoplankton in different freshwater water bodies alongwith their physico-chemical characteristics
were studied by various scholars (Veereshakumar and Hosmani 2006, Ravikumar et al. 2006, Tiwari
and Shukla 2007, Senthilkumar and Das 2008).
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) is one of leading Oil Company of India. It refines crude oil,
natural gas etc. During the process, huge amount of water is used which is non consumptive and come
out as wastewater. To treat this wastewater, ONGC has set up the waste water treatment system. The
treated waste water was stored in cemented pond before discharging into Tapi River and used for fish
culture. No additional fertilizer or supplementary feeding was added. The fish were cultured in treated
wastewater with nutrients used while treatment process. The present work was an attempt to explore
the phytoplankton diversity which is natural food and water quality of ONGC cemented pond.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
Plankton samples were collected by filtering pond water through plankton net with 60µ mesh size.
The filtrate was immediately preserved in 4% formaldehyde for the identification of phytoplankton
upto genera according to identification keys given by Edmondson (1959), APHA (2005) and Roy &
Datta Munshi (2010).
Surface water samples were collected from the cemented pond during the November 2009- October
2011 and analyzed in the laboratory for important physico-chemical parameters such as temperature,
pH, total solids (TS), total dissolved solids (TDS), total suspended solids (TSS), total hardness (TH),
©ARC Page | 1
Ekhalak Ansari et al. total alkalinity, dissolved oxygen (DO), biological oxygen demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), chloride, phosphate, silicate, nitrate and ammonia following the standard methods of APHA (2005) and Trivedi and Goel (1986). 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Phytoplankton was represented by four classes of algae viz. Euglenophycae, Chlorophyceae, Bacillariophyceae and Cyanophycae. Percentage wise contribution of phytoplankton groups are shown in Fig 1. Chlorophyceae group presented maximum (52%) while minimum (4%) by Euglenophycae. Diversity of phytoplankton during the study period has been given in Table 1 and Plate-I. The physico-chemical parameters of cemented pond of ONGC have been depicted in Table 1. The water was found dark green in color. Temperature of water was 24.515 ± 0.920°C where as the pH of water was found almost neutral during the study period (6.828 ± 0.117). Total solids, total dissolved solids and total suspended solids were found 610.839 ± 67.742 mg/L, 312.355 ± 28.511 mg/L and 321.661 ± 55.372 mg/L respectively. Total hardness and Total alkalinity recorded were 109.875 ± 9.131 mg/L and 94.015 ± 9.282 mg/L from the pond. In cemented pond concentration of chloride was found 140.262 ± 13.668 mg/L. In present study DO, BOD and COD values were recorded 5.678 ± 0.218 mg/L, 46.279 ± 8.652 mg/L and 16.437 ± 2.188 mg/L respectively. Nutrients like phosphate, silicate and nitrate were found as 0.257 ± 56.786 mg/L, 0.218 ± 0.029 mg/L and 4.089 ± 0.926 mg/L respectively. Ammonia recorded from the cemented pond was 2.059 ± 0.286 µg/L. Table1. Physico-chemical analysis of ONGC Cemented pond S.N. Parameter Treated wastewater 1. Color Dark green 2. Temperature (0C) 24.515 ± 0.920 3. Total Solids (mg/l) 610.839 ± 67.742 4. Total Dissolved Solids (mg/l) 312.355 ± 28.511 5. Total Suspended Solids (mg/l) 321.661 ± 55.372 6. pH 6.828 ± 0.117 7. Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) 5.678 ± 0.218 8. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (mg/l) 46.279 ± 8.652 9. Chemical Oxygen Demand (mg/l) 16.437 ± 2.188 10. Total Hardness (mg/l) 109.875 ± 9.131 11. Total Alkalinity (mg/l) 94.015 ± 9.282 12. Chloride (mg/l) 140.262 ± 13.668 14. Phosphate (mg/l) 0.257 ± 56.786 15. Silicate (mg/l) 0.218 ± 0.029 16. Nitrate (mg/l) 4.089 ± 0.926 17. Ammonia (µg/l) 2.059 ± 0.286 Chlorophyceae was the most significant group of phytoplankton contributing 52 % (Fig. 1) from the total phytoplankton population. The group was mostly represented by Ankistrodesmus sp., Arthrodesmus sp., Characium sp., Chariopsis sp., Chlorella sp., Chlorococcum sp., Coelastrum sp., Cosmarium sp., Crucigenia sp., Dictyosphaerium sp., Gleobtrys sp., Golenkinia sp., Hydrodictyon sp., Kirchneriella sp., Oocystis sp., Pediastrum sp., Scenedesmus sp., Sphaerocystis sp., Spirogyra sp., International Journal of Research in Environmental Science (IJRES) Page | 2
Phytoplankton Diversity and Water Quality Assessment of ONGC Pond, Hazira
Stigeoclonium sp., Tetraedron sp. and Zygnema sp. etc., as shown in Table 2. According to Philipose
(1967), Chlorophyceae group dominate the water that is rich in nutrients such as nitrate and
phosphate.
Table2. List of identified plankton from ONGC Cemented pond
Phytoplankton
Euglenophyceae Bacillariophyceae
1. Anisonema sp. 1. Achnanthes sp.
2. Entosiphon sp. 2. Amphipleura sp.
3. Lepocynclis sp. 3. Amphora sp.
Chlorophyceae 4. Anomoeoneis sp.
1. Ankistrodesmus sp. 5. Brebissonia sp.
2. Arthrodesmus sp. 6. Caloneis sp.
3. Botrydiopsis sp. 7. Cocconeis sp.
4. Chaetophora sp. 8. Cyclotella sp.
5. Characium sp. 9. Cymatopleura sp.
6. Chariopsis sp. 10. Diatoma sp.
7. Chlorella sp. 11. Fragillaria sp.
8. Chlorochytrium sp. 12. Frustulia sp.
9. Chlorococcum sp. 13. Gomphoneis sp.
10. Chlorosarcina sp. 14. Gomphonema sp.
11. Coelastrum sp. 15. Gyrosigma sp.
12. Cosmarium sp. 16. Navicula sp.
13. Crucigenia sp. 17. Nedium sp.
14. Desmidium sp. 18. Nitzschia sp.
15. Dictyosphaerium sp. 19. Pinnularia sp.
16. Geminella sp. 20. Stauroneis sp.
17. Gleobtrys sp. 21. Synadra sp.
18. Gloeocapsa sp. 22. Tabellaria sp.
19. Golenkinia sp. Cyanophyceae
20. Hydrodictyon sp. 1. Merismopedia sp.
21. Kirchneriella sp. 2. Anabaena sp.
22. Microspora sp. 3. Anacystis sp.
23. Myrmecia sp. 4. Aphanizomenon sp.
24. Oocystis sp. 5. Chrococcus sp.
25. Palmella sp. 6. Fohannesbaptistia sp.
26. Palmellococcus sp. 7. Gomphosphaeria sp.
27. Pediastrum sp. 8. Lyngbya sp.
28. Phytoconis sp. 9. Oscillatoria sp.
29. Scenedesmus sp. 10. Spirulina sp.
30. Sphaerocystis sp.
31. Spirogyra sp.
32. Stigeoclonium sp.
33. Tetraedron sp.
34. Trachychloron sp.
35. Tribonema sp.
36. Ulothrix sp.
37. Volvox sp.
38. Zygnema sp.
Bacillariophyceae group contributed 30% of total phytoplankton recorded in the cemented pond (Fig.
1). Presence of phosphate, nitrate, silicate and total hardness promoted the growth of diatoms.
Munawar (1970) suggested that regular supply of nitrate encouraged the growth of diatoms. In present
work there was good supply of nitrate for the growth of diatoms.
Cyanophyceae group was mostly represented by Merismopedia sp., Anabaena sp., Anacystis sp.,
Chrococcus sp., Gomphosphaeria sp., Lyngbya sp., Oscillatoria sp. and Spirulina sp. This group
contributed 14 % of total phytoplankton (Fig. 1). The growth of plankton may be due to the high
value of dissolved oxygen, TDS, phosphate, nitrate and BOD. Prescotte (1984) and Zafar (1964)
reported that high value of nutrients favored the growth of Cyanophyceae.
International Journal of Research in Environmental Science (IJRES) Page | 3Ekhalak Ansari et al.
Chlorophyceae
Pediastrum sp. Stigeoclonium sp. Coelastrum sp.
Crucigenia sp. Cosmarium sp. Scendesmus sp.
Bacillariophyceae
Gyrosigma sp. Nitzschia sp. Navicula sp.
Cyanophyceae
Oscillatoria sp. Merismopedia sp. Lyngbya sp.
PLATE-I
Only three species of Euglenophyceae viz., Anisonema sp., Entosiphon sp., Lepocynclis sp. were
identified from the cemented pond. The high temperature, chloride, TDS, and BOD might have
played an important role in growth and development of Euglenophyceae. Seeneyya (1971) reported
that temperature above 25°C was good for the growth of Euglenophyceae.
International Journal of Research in Environmental Science (IJRES) Page | 4Phytoplankton Diversity and Water Quality Assessment of ONGC Pond, Hazira
4. CONCLUSION
The study revealed that the cemented pond of ONGC, Hazira had a diversified group of
phytoplankton dominated by Chlorophyceae members followed by Bacillariophyceae, Cyanophyceae,
and Eugleanophyceae. Results indicated that the level of oxygen, nitrate, phosphate and silicate were
responsible for diverse group of phytoplankton in cemented pond.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Authors are thankful to ONGC, Hazira for providing the financial assistance and kind cooperation to
conduct the research work.
REFERENCES
[1]. Zafar, A.R. (1964). On the ecology of algae in certain fish pond of Hyderabad, India,
Distribution of unicellular and colonial forms. Hydrobiology, 24: 556-566.
[2]. APHA, (2005). Standard Methods for the examination of water and waste water. AWWA,
WPCE, New York, 21st edition.
[3]. Chellappa, N.T., J.M. Borba and O. Rocha (2008). Phytoplankton community and physical-
chemical characteristics of water in the public reservoir of Cruzeta, RN, Brazil. Braz. J. Biol., 68,
477-494.
[4]. CPhilipose, M.T. (1967). Fresh water phytoplankton of inland fisheries” Proc. Symp. Algology,
ICAR New Delhi, 272-291,
[5]. Eggs, J.K. and D.L. Aksnes (1992). Silicate as regulating nutrient in phytoplankton competition.
Mar. Ecol. Proc. Ser., 83, 281-289.
[6]. Prescotte, G.W. (1984). Some relationship of phytoplankton to limnology and aquatic biology,
Publisher. Amer., Assoc Adv Sci., 10:65-78.
[7]. Harikrishnan K., Sabu Thomas, Sunil George, Paul Murugan. R., Sathish Mundayoor and Das
M.R. (1999) A study on the distribution and ecology of phytoplankton in the Kuttanad wetland
ecosystem, Kerala. Poll Res. 18(3): 261-269.
[8]. Munawar, M. (1970). Limnological studies on fresh water ponds of Hyderabad India II”, The
biocenose, “Distribution of unicellular and colonial Phytoplankton in polluted and unpolluted
environments”, Hydrobiologia, 36: 105-128.
[9]. Ravikumar, M., Manjappa S, Kiran B.R. and Pullaiah, E.T. (2006). Phytoplankton periodicity in
relation to abiotic factors in Kulahalli tank near Harapanahalli, Karnataka. Nat. Environ. and
Pollut. Tech. 5: 157-161.
[10]. Raymond, E.G. (1983). plankton and productivity in the oceans. 2nd (ed.) vol.1 Pergamon press
223-237.
[11]. Roy, S.P. and Datta Munshi, J. (2010). Manual of Fresh water Biota, Narendra Publishing House
Delhi (India),
[12]. Seenayya, G. (1971).Ecological studies on the phytoplankton of certain freshwater ponds of
Hyderabad”, India II, The phytoplankton I. I bid., 13(1):55-88.
[13]. Senthilkumar, P.K. and Das A.K. (2008). Distribution of phytoplankton in some freshwater
reservoirs of Karnataka. J. Inland. Fish. Soc. India. 33: 29-36.
[14]. Tiwari, D. and Shukla, M. (2007). Algal biodiversity and trophic status of some temporary water
bodies of Kanpur. Nat. Environ. and Pollut. Tech. 6: 85-90.
[15]. Trivedy, R.K. and P.K. Goel (1986). Chemical and biological methods for water pollution
studies, Environmental Publications, Karad, India.
[16]. Veereshakumar, N.S. and Hosmani, S.P. (2006). Algal biodiversity in freshwater and related to
physicochemical factors. Nat. Environ. and Pollut. Tech. 5: 37-40.
[17]. W. T. Edmondson (1959). Freshwater Biology, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York.
International Journal of Research in Environmental Science (IJRES) Page | 5You can also read
